序 Preface | 潘公凯 Pan
Gongkai6
前言 Forword | 王 敏 Wang
Min8
十年：心手相传—与滕菲谈教学 10 Years: From Heart To Hand — Teng Fei
On Teaching | 蒋岳红 Jiang Yue
Hong10
中央美术学院首饰专业毕业生优秀作品 Excellent Graduation Artworks of
CAFA25
国际当代首饰艺术作品 Contemporary Art Jewelry175
访谈 Interview |
姜节泓 Jiang Jiehong260
艺术家简历 Biographies280
后记 Afterword | 滕 菲
Teng Fei284
內容試閱：
访谈 Interview
伊万?阿斯特弗克
你的作品存在于公认的设计策略与产品界限之外。你认为你的作品是介于“设计”与“艺术”之间呢，还是更接近“艺术”？你对作品的“亲密与激情的投入”为首饰作品营造出一种温度，一种超越佩戴者感知的美学理解。
再来区分
“设计”与“艺术”似乎有点过时了。我倒是倾向于将“为他人设计”与始于固有命题、基于当代艺术战略的工作室实践区分开来。我的作品基于我对既定艺术界域与战略的理解，我认为它在积极地重新衡量叙述性投资的同时，也成功地将模糊性与互借性融于视觉比喻与虚拟重估的创作手段中。
另一个要点是，像我这样的作品必须在发展中的叙事性首饰传统背景中进行解读。作为首饰实践的一个发展方向，叙事性首饰源于首饰本身与其意义之间的关系。一件首饰作品不仅仅是一件有价值的工艺品，其美感与材质都可计量—这些可被诠释为作品的“确切”价值，所谓确切的概念客观地出于作品固有属性。在叙事性首饰中材质本身并不重要—它的价值在于发现其情感上和心理上的投资。
这促成我使用那些有激发感情并富有叙事潜质的现成品，改造物，或所谓重新发现的物件和复制品，这些都可以激发一种“被寻见感”，特别是当作品带有强烈的私人主观心理经验和精神创伤。我的目的是重组这些物质以达成一种无意识的表象，并使用隐喻性来突出其象征性，从而使感情投资有益于创造性的表述和再现—这是一种制造遗迹的当代实践手法，将虚拟的感情投资奉于高阁。
我很喜欢你将首饰作品作为“身体与世界相遇之处”的理解。而首饰在这个相遇之处又扮演了一个什么样的角色—比如一个翻译者，向世界定义与诠释身体，还是一个讲故事的，将“你的世界”用物件的语言告知那个身体？
首饰实践为艺术与文化产品的话语带来截然不同的对制造、技术运用与物质转换之间关系的感悟，将其带入观念性思考与当代批评中去。
我的作品拓展了传统的可佩戴装饰性物体的形式，对话性地直指身体—无论当它在展览中缺失，或是佩戴时在场，成为对身体反思式的再现。由于物理制作的本性，我们可以认为作品始终暗示着身体的在场。无论最终成为哪个层面上的文化产物，手工艺品（以及那些手工与机械制作结合的作品）都带有身体介入的痕迹。然而，我所感兴趣的是当那些与身体有关的物件成为一个地方，或是与一个地方相关的概念，在那里，所有的故事被用来填补空缺、并与种种复杂、混乱或冲突相谋和交涉。
Jivan ASTFALCK
Your work exists outside the margins of recognised design products.
Do you see your work as being between ‘design’ and ‘art’, or closer
to ‘art’? The sense of intimacy and your own passionate investment
in your work create a kind of ‘temperature’ for these jewellery
pieces, that exists beyond an aesthetic understanding for the
wearer.
‘Design’ and ‘Art’ are outdated and redundant concepts; I prefer to
differentiate between ‘designing for others’ and studio practice
which is motivated by an inherent enquiry and is informed by
contemporary art strategies. While my work is informed by my
understanding of already mapped out artistic territories and
strategies, it actively re-evaluates narrative investments and, in
my view, succeeds in embedding ambiguity and cross-referencing in
terms of the creative construction of visual metaphors and
fictional reassessment.
Furthermore and significantly, work such as mine must be
understood within the context of a developing tradition of
narrative jewellery. As a strand of jewellery making practice,
narrative jewellery takes as one of its starting points the
relationship between jewellery objects and meaning. A work of
jewellery is not only a valuable object in terms of its craft,
beauty, and materially quantifiable worth—all of which might be
translated as ‘proper’ values—proper in the sense of belonging to
the object itself, objectively as its own properties. Within
narrative jewellery the object is acknowledged, and in fact
embraced, as an object of non-proper values, values which find
their source in emotional and psychological
investments.
This led me to engage with the potential of cross-referencing in
evocative and richly narrative found ready-mades, adapted and
modified, so to speak, re-found pieces and replicas that simulate
‘foundness’… especially if the pieces have a strong reference to
historical trauma in relation to private and subjective mental
experience. My aim is to re-configure these pieces to achieve an
imagery of the unconscious and address symbolisation by using
metaphoricity to cross-map emotional investments conducive to new
creative articulation and representation—a contemporary practice of
making reliquia… enshrining fictionalised emotional
investment.
I appreciate your understanding of jewellery pieces to ‘map out the
demarcation lines, where body meets world’. How do you see the
variety of roles of jewellery in this meeting—a translator, for
example, defining and interpreting the body to world, or really a
storyteller, introducing ‘your world’ through the language of the
objects to a body?
Jewellery practice brings to art and the discourse of cultural
production a distinct sensibility of the relationship between
making activity, application of skill and the transformation of
materials, to conceptual considerations and contemporary
criticality.
The work extends the traditional format of the wearable decorative
object and refers dialogically to the body, either in its absence
when exhibited, directly when actually worn or as a representation
of a reflected enquiry about the body. One could argue that the
body is always implied because of the physical nature of making.
The hand-made crafts object and those where a technological
application has been used in a combination with the hand-made
carry the traces of the body’s involvement, regardless of on which
level of cultural production they are subsequently disseminated.
However, I am interested in those body-related objects. They become
a place, or idea of a place, where narratives are invested in
body-related objects with the aim to negotiate that gap,
complexity, confusion, or conflict.
Thinking takes place in making, but my making signifies bodies all
the same; despite thinking through the mediated layers of culture,
history, and theory we are grounded in the physical—in our visceral
sensations, like pain or desire, in our longings, fears, and our
knowledge of the transience of bodily existence. Making narrative
work that maps out the demarcation lines where body meets world
happens at the node between complex referential networks, in
between the physical world of making and the world of ideas,
thought and language. My conceptualisation of the body exists in
the many facets of the in-between, at a place where we create
ourselves as individual subjects with distinct identities and where
the activity of self-creation is attuned more to its ambiguities
rather than its certainties, knowing quite well that the activity
of self-creation is fraught with disappointment, porous and
evasive.
Jack CUNNINGHAM
If I see your work within the context of narrative, in a sense, a
visual representation of ‘collections’, they often appear naturally
as a collection of various objects, or, seem to be made as an
‘object assembly’. Those collected, or made, either related or not,
were brought together to contextualise a new definition. There is
an interesting ambiguity of ‘making’ and ‘collecting’, or are they
in fact, to you, the same, as practical approaches of visual
reflection?
購物車/收銀台(0) | 在線留言板
| 付款方式
| 運費計算
| 聯絡我們
| 幫助中心 |
加入書簽
HOME
新書上架
